Slashdot Mirror
Purdue Adds New Meaning To "Student ID"
purdue_thor writes: "After the devastating loss to Notre Dame in the Women's College Basketball Championship, numbers of Purdue students took to the streets and rioted. In their wake, there was an estimated $100,000 of damage done and a cloud of tear gas that covered several blocks. In an effort to bring those responsible to justice, the Purdue Police Department have posted images of the rioters on a website and offered up to $5,000 reward money. Check out the news release here."
But don't worry: "Those pictured on the Internet were among those who defied police orders to leave areas in which the destruction and vandalism were taking place." And the Dean of Students says: "We anticipate the images also will be of interest to parents and employers."
This is partly noteworthy because it seems to be becoming a standard operating procedure on campus these days. Anonymous, electronic ratting out, with a reward attached. Is that what students want to pay for? This is the downside (or is it an upside?) to having cameras everywhere; couple that with facial recognition and then try not to be nervous.
Ok, this whole monitoring is very bad. But the point here is the damage - I, too, think these vandals should be punished for the whole damaged they caused over such a stupid thing - I mean, if it was for some noble cause, I'd be upset, but people who just cause major problems for no reason at all must pay for their crimes. The cameras were there just like cops could be there - it's technology in service of the law.
You're tired of Slashdot ads? Get junkbuster now!
1) This has happened before. In Michigan, I believe. 2) I don't know about the US, but in the UK they have a thing called the Riot Act. There's a section that has to be read aloud, after which it is an offence to remain in the area. I don't know if the police in this case have similar powers. 3) These people chose to remain in an area with rioters, even after they were asked to leave, and the worst thing that is happening to them is they get their mugshots on the web. Diddums. 4) You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.
--
Yes, the nick is flamebait
There is no issue here. People rioted and destroyed property. There are pictures of them in the act. The cops are using those pictures to try to apprehend the suspects. Sounds to me as if the cops are doing what they are paid to do.
There would be an issue if non-participants were being sought or if the suspects rights were being violated or due process was not being followed but that's not the case.
Perhaps "UNIV 101" needs to include a week on "break the law: go to jail". Too many kids today are spoiled rotten (rioting over a stupid game?) and have never learned that there are consequences to any action or decision. Self-reliance and personal responsibility used to be virtues, today everyone's a victim.
The people in these pictures are clearly rioting, and most are actively involved in destructive activities. (smashing, stealing, burning, adding fuel to fires, etc...) How is this any different than traditional wanted posters, except that the pictures are on the web and the people involved are mostly students from my alma mater?
It's pretty standard for law enforcement to offer rewards for tips to find criminals. The people rioting are idiots. I lived right smack in the middle of another one of these riots at Purdue when the Women's team won-- people actually climbed up the side of the house my apartment was in, pulled down fairly large trees, burned furniture and garbage in the middle of major streets, etc...
In fact, coming home from the computer lab in MSEE one night I had the misfortune to witness a naked drunk guy playing the PU fight song on a tuba. An even less fortunate friend was unintentionally gassed since he had to pass the riot's center on the way home. Nobody would have been gassed at all of the rioting retards had found something better to do.
I fail to see how anyone's rights are being infringed in any way here. These people comitted a crime, and the police are offering a reward to anyone who helps track them down.
I took a look at a few of these pictures, (just the first two pages), and to be honest, I see a bunch of people smiling not doing anything. In fact I feel that for the bulk of the people in these pictures, Purdue is commiting defimation of chericter by labeling them rioters. The only thing there "guilty" of is not leaving the area when the police told them too. That is not rioting. I'm even pretty sure it's not illigal to stand in a public roadway or park.
The thing that really upsets me is that little quote, "We anticipate the images also will be of interest to parents and employers." That is awful. And I feel that it probably accounts to blackmail. It might as well say, "Students, if you join in a celebration, or wander outside to see whats going on, we'll blacklist you."
What is important to do now is for every single person who went to, or worked for Purdue, to send a polite e-mail to them, and tell them its despicable. Personally, I'm ashamed to have ever gone to Purdue.
You are only young once, but you can stay immature indefinitely.
A lot of people the next day were complaining about how the police were arresting/gassing the violent rioters as well as the by-standers. In my opinion, if you are out in the middle of a riot and don't leave when the cops show up: a) you're an idiot; b) you are hindering the police's ability to maintain order. Others have made the statement that they were just trying to get home and were "caught in the riot." If you are walking home and see a big, violent group of people then walk around them and find another way home. My friend was walking home from school during a riot 2 years ago. He was chased by a naked, drunken tuba player and the riots were blocking his way home, too, but he didn't get into the riot; he went around them and got home without being tear gassed or tipping over a car.
People have been complaining about this all last week, but they were out there helping to create the problem. If these "by-standers" had stayed inside (when they KNEW full well that there would be riots), it wouldn't have been a riot but just isolated incidences of violence. I think posting the pictures of the idiots in the riots will not only take away the assumed anonymity of being out in PUBLIC (where some of the riots erupted) or on private property (I don't know if a land-grant university is considered public or private property), but make them be responsible for their actions.
I think the statement about employers and parents is a good one, too. When I own a company or am hiring for one, I want to know if my prospective employees are going to have a mind of their own or will just succumb to mob mentality.
These people are in freaking college now. They are supposed to be adults, able to carry guns and drink responsibly. If they can't even control their anger at the loss of a basketball game (assuming they actually care about the game) or control the urge to riot for fun, they should no longer be treated as adults and should be expelled from the university. Having their pictures up on the web for everyone to see is showing them that they have to act like citizens to be treated like citizens.
IANAL, but I play one on
i'm a bit suspicious when i am told a given event was a "riot". Maybe this is just a side-effect of having lived in LA, but this word seems to be ponied out whenever police want to justify extreme action against innocent citizens. And in this case, the term is being used to justify suggesting filial and professional persecution (without a trial or a verdict) on the basis of mere photographs which themselves do not necessarily show any crime being committed.
i wonder how public response to this would differ if the gathering had been composed primarily of non-students. Say a meeting of local Democratic Socialists was photographed and published, with a caveat for employers and potential mates. What do you think?
It sucks when someone innocent gets hurt in a riot. Whose fault is it? The rioters, plain and simple. What should happen to the rioters? They should be arrested, plain and simple.
You are correct to state that my friend's picture should not be posted-- but you ignored another key point of my post. I have looked at ALL of the pictures on their website, and every single person whose photo was posted was engaged in illegal activity in AT LEAST one of the photos of that person. (some people made multiple appearances, but seemed to be consistently numbered.) Additionally, not all people in the pictures were numbered and listed as wanted, and finally, many of the pictures were cropped to eliminate innocent bystanders.
If the cops read the riot act, it was against the law to BE there. So I ask my original question again-- if these people committed a crime (and they have all been photographed doing so) how is this different than a wanted poster?
But hey, this is /. - where my opinion counts too!
Actually, I looked at all the pictures, and in only a very few of them (mostly all on the very last set) show actual "property" destruction:
Photos 28, 29 and 30 seem to show people dragging branches somewhere. With the occurrance of fire in several images, we can suspect that they are dragging them to a fire (but hey, who knows - maybe they have some crafting they need to do?)...
At least photo 53 wasn't as stupid (next time, wear a ski mask!)...
Photo 58 shows a man wielding a large piece of what appears to be wood - maybe going to throw it on a fire - or bash Mr. 61 about the shoulders, one of the two (wipe that smirk off yer face, nugget!)...
Photo 62 - Praise Stallman!!!
Photo 70 - Use the Force, Luke!!
Photo 77 - "Dude, where'd my doob go...? F*ckin' riot..."
Photo 86 - Now showing a better image of the Cydonian Face...
photos 95 and 96 show someone with another large piece of wood - probably not a picket sign. On the same page we have 99 and 101 doing more branch dragging (they must love crafting there at Purdue!)...
Photo 109 - Wow! I found a doob!
Now, it definitely looks like in Photo 150 there is a set of individuals up to no good with that mailbox - but why don't they note that the other guy (in black pants and grey vest) was involved as well? And why does that man look like he may actually be security or something?
The final page is about the only one that shows real good clear pictures of anybody causing destruction - and if you notice, most of the stuff they seem to be burning came from a DUMPSTER. They must value their trash very highly at Purdue, alright...
So, in closing - while there seem to have been some people causing havoc, and that one shouldn't blatently set fire to anything in public, I doubt $100,000 worth of damage occurred (unless they count the mailbox and the signpost - but only the mailbox seemed damaged). If those were damaged, then the individuals should have to pay retribution (include Mr. Blackpants, whoever he is). As for the others, they just seem to be bystanders, who didn't stop what was happening (and rant all you want about them not stopping it, but I would be they either wouldn't be heard, or they would be assaulted for their views, or something equally bad).
Oh, BTW, photo 49 offends me - WTF is that guy grabbing himself for? It ain't going anywhere, pal (actually, it takes more than that to offend me, but I have to admit the guy looks patently stupid making that gesture - I mean, if that guy can get a higher education, than anybody should).
Worldcom - Generation Duh!
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
Police investigating the vandalism and
rapes of Woodstock '99 have posted images on
the Web. Quite frankly, sending cops to a live
crime scene with digital cameras (or using press
photos), or cops soliciting images from bystanders, bothers me not one bit.
I live in Boulder, a college town which has also seen riots protesting the Vietnam War, social injustice... and the police harrassing underage drinkers. (Guess which motivated the riots a few years ago.)
A couple quick points, to address common misperceptions:
<li>The riots might have occured in the student ghetto, but many of the rioters were not students. Some were young adults living in the area, others were bored idiots who rode the bus from Denver looking for excitement.
<li>These riots caused a lot of damage. Broken glass, overturned cars, etc. The trustafarians might not have been inconvenienced, but a lot of students and young adults are living near the edge anyway and losing their car - and the job it took them to - could be enough to force them out of college.
<li>A dumpster fire doesn't look dangerous, but many occured below overhanging trees or near buildings. Large fires can be unpredictable and it doesn't take much for one to jump to a house. It's about as "harmless" as firing a gun into a crowd and saying "no harm, no foul" because nobody was hit.
<li>Despite all of this, the crowd was still mostly peaceful. But every mob has its idiots and some of them threw rocks at the cops - some of which hit helmets with enough impact to cause damage. Hard enough to result in critical injuries to anyone not wearing a helmet.
Put all of this together, and the cops would have been legally justified in arresting everyone on the spot. But the cops also knew that this would likely result in deaths - some of these people would be carrying guns or knives, and in fact the police had positioned snipers on nearby rooftops against this possibility. A lot of people who were there just for "fun" would become violent if they perceived a threat.
Since the authorities and police wanted to minimize harm, they decided to contain the riots and look for the key players later. So they took pictures and put them up on their web page, on the city's cable TV channel, in the newspaper, etc. Many (most?) of the people sought were found and peacefully arrested, without the risk of escalating the violence of the mob.
Bottom line: we haven't had riots for several years. The ends don't always justify the means, but few residents find police taking pictures of riot after people have been ordered off the street (because of the riot, not "just because") to be an unreasonable burden.
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
Here is a near verbatim copy of the letter the dean of students sent all of us Purdue students in response to the rioting, minus the dean's phone # and email address.
Enjoy.
_________________________
TO: All Purdue Students
FROM: Tony Hawkins
Dean of Students
dean.of.students@purdue.edu
SUBJECT: Violence and Vandalism
In the wake of the campus disturbance a week ago Sunday night, following the NCAA women's title basketball game, I am writing to express my concern, inform you about student conduct procedures, and solicit your help.
I know most of you will agree that this conduct was unacceptable. It demeaned our women athletes at a time they should have received our highest praises and compliments for a splendid season. It embarrassed the student body and reflected negatively on the University's reputation around the world. More than $75,000 in property was destroyed. (Costs continue to mount daily in staff time spent in the aftermath.) Emails, phone calls, and letters to Purdue officials run to extremes - from some calling for resignations of staff who "let this happen" to others who voice concern about overreaction and punishment of the innocent. Parents are rightfully worried. Residents experienced a fearful night that night and remain anxious about a potential repeat. The community is justifiably angry. Alumni are outraged. The reputation of the University is tarnished.
In the long run, we all pay for the damages, and some of the damages cannot have a price tag attached. These damages, however, are not simply someone else's expenses.
It is a miracle that no one was seriously injured in the dozens of fires that were set, including one that nearly burned overhead electrical wires that could have fallen into the crowd, and others that were set adjacent to buildings. Many of the spectators unwittingly put themselves in danger.
Most of our more than 37,000 students were not involved. In fact, some tried to discourage the vandalism and even helped extinguish fires. But at least 1,000 students participated. Spectators hanging on the sidelines provided a cloak of anonymity to the more destructive participants and helped create conditions in which rioters could easily escape. A large portion of the crowd even cheered and incited destruction and violence while a smaller group lit fires, broke windows, threw rocks and destroyed vehicles.
This kind of behavior is unacceptable at Purdue. Any students identified as actively participating in the destructive and dangerous activity will be charged by police and referred both to the prosecutor's office and to the Office of the Dean of Students for disciplinary procedures. With sufficient evidence, they can be suspended or expelled from Purdue. It is sad to think that one's future can so quickly change because of a momentary lapse in reason.
Additionally, all students need to be aware that they are not just spectators when they are asked by public officials to leave a scene. In order to protect people and property, these authorities must have clear and safe paths to do so. At the point of refusing to comply with these public officials, those who choose to remain can be identified and charged. In some cases they may be facing more than a fine and a court case. A student's status with the University can also be in jeopardy because of his/her refusal to comply with directions of University officials.
Finally, I am asking all of you to work within your housing units, student organizations and circle of friends to help all of us bring to a halt the kind of mob-like violence and destruction we have seen at Purdue over the past few years. Please do not let the actions of a few who fail to see all the interconnections between the past, the present, and the future undermine the reputation of Purdue, one that has been built upon the care and concern of generations of other students, faculty, and staff.
With Grand Prix week only days away, I urge you to promote pride in Purdue through positive actions and behaviors. Let's demonstrate that we can enjoy and celebrate special events with greater integrity and class than other campuses! Talk to each other. Ask yourself what you and your friends can do. Take back Your University. A reputation is an easy thing to destroy and so hard to repair!
L. Tony Hawkins, Ph.D.
Dean of Students
Schleman Hall, Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907-1096
This created quite a furor in the local campus newspaper (like every other issue in Boulder), and if I remember correctly, most of those pictured were brought into custody.
A violation of our rights? I don't know. Most of the pictures were submitted from people who were there, no doubt hoping to leech some kind of recognition or reward for their actions. Personally I like to sit back and watch Darwin point his finger at the not-so-fittest, it's very amusing.
As long as the police aren't mounting cameras hidden behind trees in the trouble centers (centralized on the University Hill), I don't think there's much in the way of protection against this. The photographers were valid witnesses to a valid crime, and thus are holding evidence in their hands. It's not any form of covert surveillance.
And my word of advice to the rioters: damn, guys -- try not to look so drunk...
Ryan Bruels bruels@cs.colorado.edu
"All your base are belong to this file I send in order to have your advice."
I have seen "Crime Stoppers" reports on TV news for years where anonymous tips are solicited. So, doing it all at once seems like a logical extension of that idea...
Posted from the wireless couch.
I missed this riot, since I've graduated. But the last one (when the women's team WON...), which I got to witness firsthand was worse than what you see in these pictures. Either this one was lightweight, or the cameraman was always pointed in the wrong direction. If the fires were lit in the usual locations, then they were in the middle of pretty busy streets. The vast bulk of the monetary damage was probably done to:
1. Outdoor furniture. Lots of the frats and apartments near campus and the "popular" rioting areas have couches and crap outside, which quickly becomes part of the bonfire.
2. Campus buildings. Smashed doors and windows and whatnot. Plus vandalism.
3. Apartments and houses. So many people climbed the trees in my front yard that one was pulled down under the weight. Windows get broken. Our front porch railing and one of the supports that holds the porch up were completely destroyed. Someone nailed a dead raccoon to our front door, among other things.
4. Cars. Traffic stops, people stand on the cars, smashy smashy, etc...
5. A large quantity of footwear becomes entangled in power lines. (this happens all the time, though...)
6. Flaming trash in the street is a pain to clean up. Somebody has to pay the workers.
The sad thing is that most of those people probably didn't even watch the game. They heard about it at the bars and wandered out drunk into the streets to smash things.
A few of the pictures are questionable, but all of the people could have left when asked by the police.
Not one to let the quality of this post not slip early, the poster has to cram a contradiction into the first sentence for us.
In fact I feel that for the bulk of the people in these pictures, Purdue is commiting (sic) defimation (sic) of chericter (sic) -- is this person's "a" key malfunctioning or something? -- by labeling them rioters. The only thing there (sic) "guilty" of is not leaving the area when the police told them too. (sic) That is not rioting. Correct. Not moving when asked to by a police officer is not rioting. However, participating in the festivities is rioting. I'm even pretty sure it's not illigal (sic) to stand in a public roadway or park. Not on its own...
The thing that really upsets me is that little quote, "We anticipate the images also will be of interest to parents and employers." That is awful. And I feel that it probably accounts -- I'll assume you mean "amounts", as "accounts" doesn't make any sense in this context -- to blackmail.
Huh? How is it blackmail? Are you suggesting that the police asked them for money in exchange for not posting the pictures before posting them? Do you have any evidence to support this claim? (Or do you just not know what "blackmail" means? After all, evidence suggests that you don't own a dictionary. =)
It might as well say, "Students, if you join in a celebration, -- in other words, if you riot, -- or wander outside to see whats (sic) going on, we'll blacklist you."
What is important to do now is for every single person who went to, or worked for Purdue, to send a polite e-mail to them, and tell them its (sic) despicable. I don't see how sending a bunch of self-referencing hate mail about Purdue would be useful. But you might want to complain about this incident in particular.
Personally, I'm ashamed to have ever gone to Purdue. Is it safe to assume that you are currently frosh or have never graduated? Or are the English requirements really that low at Purdue? =)
This happens fairly frequently at Purdue.
In any case, I received an email from one of my previous employers while at Purdue. The email contained pictures of 2 trucks that were completely destroyed.
One was a box truck that had no "box" left, as it had completely disintegrated. The interior was torched.
The second round of pictures were for a full-size van that was also torched.
There is no excuse for the destruction of other people's property like that. Especially considering things like this make the school look bad, raise tuition, and cause other problems that students don't want/need to deal with.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
Although I'm no expert on riots by any extent of the imagination, it seems to me that one of the things that encourages otherwise reasonably well behaved individuals to act up, is the fact that they can commit these crimes with relative safety, knowing that the size of their numbers gives them both an immediate physical shield from the police (short-term protection) and a degree of anonymity (longer-term protection). Since it has been demonstrated time and time again that it is extremely difficult and often dangerous for the police to attempt to subdue much larger crowds, this method of photographing and identifying the problem causers appears to be the best possible solution. If the rioters _know_ that if they participate in rioting, that they will be punished within a few days or weeks, then that should prevent the vast majority of them from acting up. While an extremely small percentage may not be sane enough to restrain themselves, the police can handle them more easily, especially since the sane crowd will want to disassociate themselves from the troublemakers (rather then cheering, aiding, and what not). As long as the police execute this photographing properly, the benefits far far outweigh the costs (e.g., someone not being anonymous in a rioting crowd, even if they themselves are not rioting). I don't see how anyone can consider this and still find it objectionable.
Welcome to the Soviet Socialist Republic of North America !! Nasdrovia, tovarisch!
In the case of a Riot, where there is destruction of property, I would assume that the police could of course demand that people leave. But it may be the case that some of those who remained were not guilty of a criminal act other than just being there, and therefore wouldn't be committing any more than a very minor misdemeanor.
Insofar as your statement that there is no right or expectatiobn of privacy in public, that is true to a certain extent. Pictures of a crowd are very different from pictures of one individual, who does not wish to be photographed specifically. When you single someone out, that, in my opinion, violates their right to privacy (assuming they are not committing a crime).
Another thing to be considered is the possiblity that some of the crowd might not have been students, and were perhaps as young as 15 years old. If that is the case, it would be illegal to publish pictures of them in relation to a crime (Juveniles are protected specifically against this sort of thing by Federal Statute).
Jaeger
www.JohnQHacker.com
GodHatesCalvinists.com
www.amiguiltyornot.gov